> Imho it is a shame to waste some of tihs nice image details in .jpg
> compression, how about posing lossless compressed version (i.e. png) ?
>

Because JPG is 74KB and PNG (reduced to 8 bit per sample) is 560KB
and not everybody has a ADSL connection?

-Ive

Post a reply to this message

You said the lighting is nog the same as in the original painting. Does this
include the lack of reflections on the varnished woods? the cello and the
mirrorframe are reflective, judging from the painting, however, your
rendering doesn't show any of this. I would think that some reflection on
the varnished wooden surfaces wood enhance this image...

For the rest, all I can say is: "      " while I'm amazed...

oh, one more thing. The cloth is stitched(?), right? In any case, I guess it
is made of many small threads. Maybe you could bring some of that back with
the technique developed and showed a while ago by Kedar Patil
(http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/27430/)?

Post a reply to this message

"Ive" <ive### [at] lilysoftcom> wrote in news:3da1e9eb$1@news.povray.org

>> Imho it is a shame to waste some of tihs nice image details in .jpg
>> compression, how about posing lossless compressed version (i.e. png) ?

> Because JPG is 74KB and PNG (reduced to 8 bit per sample) is 560KB
> and not everybody has a ADSL connection?

perhaps link to www with this image ? can I get .png 24 bit version on 
mailto:pov### [at] raf256com please :) ?


-- 
#macro g(U,V)(.4*abs(sin(9*sqrt(pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))))*pow(1-min(1,(sqrt(
pow(x-U,2)+pow(y-V,2))*.3)),2)+.9)#end#macro p(c)#if(c>1)#local l=mod(c,100
);g(2*div(l,10)-8,2*mod(l,10)-8)*p(div(c,100))#else 1#end#end light_source{
y 2}sphere{z*20 9pigment{function{p(26252423)*p(36455644)*p(66656463)}}}//M

Post a reply to this message

> You said the lighting is nog the same as in the original painting. Does this
> include the lack of reflections on the varnished woods? the cello and the
> mirrorframe are reflective, judging from the painting, however, your
> rendering doesn't show any of this. I would think that some reflection on
> the varnished wooden surfaces wood enhance this image...

Indeed you can see a very small amount of highlights on both, the viol and
the mirror frame, but you are right, it's not visible enough. And as the
image uses only radiosity, specular highlights do not work, so all is done
with blurred reflection, and a good amount for this was difficult to guess.
And as mentioned this is just a first test to get an overall impression, there is
still a lot of work with fine tuning.

And BTW the instrument on the floor is a viol or gambe, the cello was
not yet invented :)

>
> For the rest, all I can say is: "      " while I'm amazed...
>
thanks, but do not hold your breath too long...

> oh, one more thing. The cloth is stitched(?), right? In any case, I guess it
> is made of many small threads. Maybe you could bring some of that back with
> the technique developed and showed a while ago by Kedar Patil
> (http://news.povray.org/povray.binaries.images/27430/)?

I have thought about this, but my guess: rendertime increases from days to years.
There are still those *natural* limitations for us render folks.

-Ive

Post a reply to this message

3da1f054@news.povray.org...

> Indeed you can see a very small amount of highlights on both, the viol and
> the mirror frame, but you are right, it's not visible enough. And as the
> image uses only radiosity, specular highlights do not work, so all is done
> with blurred reflection, and a good amount for this was difficult to
guess.

Well well, put them in a light_group and fake it :-)

G.



--
**********************
http://www.oyonale.com
**********************
- Graphic experiments
- POV-Ray and Poser computer images
- Posters

Post a reply to this message

Ive,

Regarding a third window in Vermeer's "A Music Lesson" (the room was also
used as a setting for several other of his works), I by chance encountered
a book called "Vermeer's Camera" in my local bookstore about a week ago.

The book contains a detailed examination of the spaces in which Vermeer set
his paintings, in an attempt to explain the artists use of optical devices
to assist in his work.

I remember seeing several illustrations, and at least one photograph, of a
fully reconstructed stage set for the interior featured in "The Music
Lesson". A third window is clearly present in these illustrations and
photographs.

In the book, the lighting in the photographic reproduction of "The Music
Lesson" (very much like what you are attempting, but done with stage sets
and lighting instead of PovRay) is very very close to the painting, and I
do not believe the third window has been covered in any way.

The book also offers some measurements for certain items in Vermeer's
paintings, based on the reconstructions. I remember seeing window heights,
table lengths, etc. in an appendix in the back.

I can't rememeber the author or publisher, but I know the book is called
"Vermeer's Camera" and was published in the last year or so in the UK, and
recently in paperback in America.

Hope this info helps!

Post a reply to this message

Ive,

I just remembered something and now have to correct myself about my previous
post regarding three windows in Vermeer's interior for "The Music Lesson".

There is an illustration in the book I mentioned which shows the interior
for the painting in question with the bottom half of the third window
covered by outside shutters!

So there is your answer to the third window question. This means you might
have to do a little extra modeling if you feel like being really precise,
and I have no idea what those shutters might have looked like. But there is
a website you might find very useful, the website for the book:
http://www.vermeerscamera.co.uk

Post a reply to this message

Ive wrote:

> I assume that Vermeer would not have placed his easel in the darkest place of
> the room . . . What does this mean? Has Vermeer closed the window shades
> because he preferred this kind of lighting for the room even if this means
> his canvas was lit very poor? Or did he close the window shades, looked at
> the room, opened them to do some brush strokes, closed them again...

Actually, Vermeer was probably using a camera obscura, which means that he
was indeed sitting in the darkest part of the room.  More info here:

http://www.grand-illusions.com/vermeer/vermeer1.htm

Post a reply to this message

> I just remembered something and now have to correct myself about my previous
> post regarding three windows in Vermeer's interior for "The Music Lesson".
>
> There is an illustration in the book I mentioned which shows the interior
> for the painting in question with the bottom half of the third window
> covered by outside shutters!
>
> So there is your answer to the third window question. This means you might
> have to do a little extra modeling if you feel like being really precise,
> and I have no idea what those shutters might have looked like. But there is
> a website you might find very useful, the website for the book:
> http://www.vermeerscamera.co.uk
>

Herman Serras has also mentioned this book in a post some weeks ago, and
I have ordered it already in my next corner bookstore - but this is a small, old
fashioned store where the owner seems to read all the books by himself before
selling them. Still, I never have seen this book by myself.

and I am soooooo curious....

-Ive

Post a reply to this message

> Actually, Vermeer was probably using a camera obscura, which means that he
> was indeed sitting in the darkest part of the room.  More info here:
>
> http://www.grand-illusions.com/vermeer/vermeer1.htm
>

Yes, I know the rumours about his use of a camera obscura. In my
opinion, this is not true.
But anyway, if he has used such advanced technologies and optical
utilities, he could be considered as the first *raytracer* ever. And
from my point of view, this would not weaken his reputation as a
great artist in any way.

-Ive

Post a reply to this message